The ethical issues regarding hydraulic fracturing to extract natural gas in the Karoo are abundant and complex. Although it is not a new procedure with new technology, South Africa and especially the Karoo is not use to this term and what it entitles. There is no reason why the shale formations should not be developed to its full potential but the crisis is balancing the development and not effecting the residence living there in a negative manner. Communities was built where water was availability, industries contaminating that supply is simply unacceptable (Potter & Rashid, 2013). A lot of questions surrounds fracking, questions involving national government and job creation, local municipalities and job opportunities, economists and revenue, relevant infrastructure concerning local economy, local developers, current land owners and property value, food security, social and moral decline in society, local governments feeling towards Ubuntu and the list goes on and on. Although the list of potential problems is long, there is also some benefits in this industry as well. The state of South Africa now has a new form of revenue that will be collected by tax and permits. All cities and small town in the Karoo will benefit from all the new business brought on by the new drilling operators. All the farmers owning mineral rights will be financially rewarded by the gas industry leasing those rights (Potter & Rashid, 2013). The fact that natural resources continuous to dwindle is obvious, therefore the need for sustainable energy from alternative resources is completely understandable. Natural gas in the Karoo has raised several optimism regarding the abundance that has been found, however several ethical issues raises when drilli... ... middle of paper ... ...Waxmann et al. (2011) 750 different chemicals were used by various oil and gas companies during hydraulic fracturing over a four year period, where a minimum of 29 were identified to contain carcinogens which are listed as hazardous on both the clean air and safe drinking water act. The USEPA (2011) suggested that chemicals used during fracking should be monitored according to specific criteria. With the technical background in mind, this is certainly one of the categories to decide if fracking is ethical or not. The question can now be asked if transparency is being practiced. If it is not, then there will be ethical questions raised. Take the fracking industry for example, as seen above they have hidden some of the contents of the mixture being used. So now using this poisonous fluid and not telling the public about it that is not seen as ethical practice.
In today's global economy, energy is one of the most crucial and sought after commodities. Who supplies it and how much they supply determines how much influence they have over other countries as well as the global economy. This is why hydraulic fracturing is currently such an important and controversial topic in the United States. Hydraulic fracturing, more commonly known as "fracking" or hydrofracturing, is the process of using pressurized liquids to fracture rocks and release hydrocarbons such as shale gas, which burns more efficiently than coal. This booming process of energy production provides a much needed economic boost, creating jobs and providing gas energy for Americans. The efficiently burning shale gas reduces carbon emission from electricity production plants, reducing carbon footprints on the environment. However, the process of hydraulic fracturing uses millions of gallons of pressurized liquid, which contains toxic chemicals, and some of this water is left over undealt with. The air near fracking sites is often also polluted and unsafe for nearby community residents. Injecting millions of gallons of water laced with toxic chemicals into the rock thousands of feet deep can cause earthquakes, causing a safety hazards for all nearby areas. Hydraulic Fracturing makes rare natural gases easily attainable, boosting the economy and reducing carbon emissions. However, the negative side effects such as contaminated water and air, make hydraulic fracturing a process that may not be worth the benefits.
The oil and gas industry has been met with increasing opposition over the years, with fracking and water pollution being some of the most controversial subjects alongside others like pollution, global warming, and claims of corruption. While some anti-frack claims seem like viable arguments, many are the product of misconceptions, an uninformed public. One of the greatest examples of this is Josh Fox’s 2010 documentary GasLand, whose most memorable scene showed a man in Fort Lupton, Colorado, lighting his faucet on fire, blaming it on hydraulic fracturing. After the film was released, among numerous errors it contained, it was found that the water well contained naturally occurring biogenic gas unrelated to oil and gas activity (Energy In Depth).
In the documentary Gasland the main concerns of Josh Fox regarding hydraulic fracturing were the industry was highly unregulated and reckless which caused the contamination of ground and drinking water which was the cause of illness.. The most important concern Josh had was hydraulic fracturing was causing the contamination of peoples ground and drinking water. He claims hydraulic fracturing is causing gases such as methane and heavy metals such as mercury, use...
No matter how you look at the effects of fracking, the loose is greater than the gain. It could help the country economically, by providing many jobs and being able to produce our own fuels. We would save a lot of money, but would be wasting our environment. The effects of the chemicals used would slowly be killing us. They would be left in our ground water and we would consume this without even knowing. Our water sources would become so contaminated that we would not be able to consume it. If we do not stop fracking now, we will only be asking for a dangerous future.
Conflicting reports make it difficult to discern just how detrimental the practice is to the environment and people. What is known is that fracking uses phenomenal amounts of water, which is becoming a scarce resource in many parts of the country. There is no doubt that the fluid used in the fracking process contains chemicals, and when released into water supplies has negative effects on these sources. Injection of flowback materials into deep wells has been definitively linked to increased seismic activity. Damage to roads due to the high traffic of trucks shipping equipment and product is astronomical. Worldwide, four countries have outright banned the practice and others are waiting for more research to be done before they continue to allow it. A few states know the devastating side effects that come with the practice, and have banned hydraulic fracturing. While there is no doubt that fracking can produce resources that are used by Americans, there is a lot of doubt as to whether it is safe or not. Hopefully, the country will follow those that have banned the practice, and adopt other safer forms of energy
Because of fracking within our nation we are experiencing an abundance of cheap natural gas that provides power for hospitals, schools, homes and mass transit systems. Because of this sudden growth and development the job market has massive opportunities available for Americans. The regions that have seen the highest growth in these opportunities are in Texas and North Dakota. Additionally North Dakota has seen the highest jump in income by 7.6 percent and the lowest unemployment rate in the United States. However what is ultimately shaping this economic boom is our dependence on fossil fuels. With the ever present dangers to the environment “fossil fuels will lead to increased emissions of greenhouse gases and an acceleration in climate change, the extraction of these materials will involve ever greater cost, danger and environmental risk as energy firms operate deeper and in more problematic rock formations (Klare).” Because of the end of easy access deposits the increase investment of time, money and resources becomes more valuable the deeper we extract and the more we choose to extract the more we pollute. The amount of resources that is invested into a single facking site is staggering. More than 8 million gallons of water can be used in a single frack and laced with over 600 chemicals. Some of these chemicals are known carcinogens and dangerous toxins that cause harm on
Natural gas burning plants have replaced many coal burning plants, which benefits the environment greatly. Also, as the United States continues to become a prominent exporter of natural gas, the price of natural gas has dropped by about 30%. This is why I believe it is important to strictly regulate fracking, as opposed to stopping the practice as a whole. If regulations were placed that called for the fracturing to take place exclusively within the layer of shale, the toxic fluids and the gas would not have access to pathways that would allow them to seep into neighboring aquifers or permeable bedrock. This would make groundwater contamination by hydraulic fracturing much more unlikely. Also if the companies that engaged in the technique were required to be more transparent and disclose the chemicals that they were using in their fluid, it would allow the public to have more power and discretion in regards to which companies they support. If a company was found to use toxic chemicals in their fluid, then pressure could be put on the company to change their fluid’s composition through boycotts or through political
Imagine a world where fresh and clear water was a luxury. Imagine water so contaminated with chemicals that every plant it comes into contact with dies. As the trees begin to die, oxygen levels drop. As the vegetation dies, wildlife begins to die out. The polluted water which flows through the ground into wells causes instant contamination. As the water flows out of the sink, one can strike a match and light the liquid on fire. Showering in these chemicals is out of the question. Fresh water has become a comfort, rather than a given. Could planet Earth survive this existence? If hydraulic fracturing, otherwise known as fracking, were deemed legal, this question may be put to the test. Fracking is a process in which chemicals, sand and water are used in “high volumes… to fracture gas-bearing layers of rock” (Dolesh 2). As the rock breaks, natural gas is released and then collected to be used as energy. The United States is currently sitting on a gold mine of natural gas which could stimulate our ever declining economy. The question is what price are we willing to pay for a temporary fix? Fracking is a dangerous process that should be deemed illegal due to its harmful short and long-term environmental effects.
Fracking requires water containing various chemicals to be shot into the ground under a vacuum. This water will then flow back up with the extracted oil or natural gas or will be absorbed into the natural water supply. Furthermore, when oil and natural gas are extracted from the ground, water, known as coproduced water, will also be extracted. Kyle Murray writes that “due to the poor quality of coproduced water it is, in most cases, subsequently disposed via deep subsurface wastewater injection wells” (4919). These wastewater injection wells function by injecting water deep into the group where it cannot interact with the regular drinking water. These wastewater injection wells, however, lead to other problems which will be discussed later. Further problems can be seen in that the chemicals injected with the water can be toxic to the environment and the people around areas containing fracking. Sarah Gosman states, “The fluids may enter groundwater directly from the wellbore if the casing is of poor quality or the cementing is inadequate, conditions that the high pressures of high-volume hydraulic fracturing could exacerbate” (97). These chemicals could easily seep into the drinking water and scientists are not sure the damage that they could cause. There is also currently a lack of regulations on the disclosure of chemicals being injected for these
Fracking is a highly controversial practice that utilizes the injection of water, chemicals and abrasives to extract relatively inaccessible pockets of natural resources. Although fracking has the potential to benefit the economy, it may also pose a significant impact on the environment, the ecosystem and safety.
Hydraulic fracturing can be very damaging to the human body, there have even been lawsuits. Bob and Lisa Parr stated that after suffering through years of things such as rashes, ringing ears, nosebleeds, and nausea they had enough. The Parr’s sued the company, Chesapeake Energy Corporation, and once the case was over, they ended up receiving almost three million dollars. (The Fracking Facts) This is significant because this was the first lawsuit that was successful in the United States that was linked to poisonous air pollution of gas or oil production. Also, in 2012 a company known as Chesapeake Energy Corporation was found guilty of contaminating the drinking water of three families in Pennsylvania. Leading to a 1.6 million dollar lawsuit. Stated the article The Fracking Facts.
There are many problems with “The entire process of fracking – from drilling a well to transporting waste – endangers our water and the health of our communities” (“Fracking”). The process of fracking contaminates drinkable water and many other resources along with it. When rivers or lakes are contaminated it can lead to the extermination of wildlife in that certain area because they no longer are able to breathe due to the amount of chemicals and waste in their habitat. After an accident with a decent amount of exploding trucks, “Twenty-five families living nearby had to evacuate their homes, one person was injured, and toxic chemicals leaked into a nearby stream” (“Act On Fracking”). Companies involved with fracking should either move away from important resources when drilling or completely stop the operation as a whole.
In the United States, drilling and fracking are exempt from the landmark environmental laws, including the Safe Drinking Water Act, thanks to loopholes Congress and regulators. 40,000 gallons of chemical are used per fracturing, it takes four hundred trucks to bring water to each site. During each fracturing 600 chemicals are used in fracturing fluid including
There is a list of both good and bad things about fracking. Some of the good are true, but mostly, the bad take over. Fracking helps the U.S economically by limiting the amount of resources that we have to buy from other countries. There are enough fossil fuels underground to make us energy independent. There are also bad things about fracking.
Numerous reports have been given on the dangerous affects of hydraulic fracturing. One such affect that has been noticed is that drinking water wells near the fracturing sites have been contaminated. During the hydro-fracking process, injected fluids that help to break and keep open the rock bed where the natural gas is kept, have “been known to travel three thousand feet from the well (Goldman).” This fluid could have the potential to enter and contaminate any water well for homes around hydraulic fracturing sites. This incident is one of the major problems that people want to figure out and know about before they allow a fracturing site by them. It has been the most feared outcome of having a fracking site nearby, and it is highly appropriate. One site in Wyoming had this happen, “…in August, EPA reported that eleven of thirty-nine drinking-water wells near a Wyoming hydraulic fracturing operation were contaminated with chemicals used in the fracturing process (Hobson EPA).” In Pennsylvania, another such case occurred, “There have already been severe pollution cases in Pennsylvania, mo...